Lord had Herod the Tetrarch in his mind; this being the case, he takes an occasion to shew, under a feigned character, suggested by this prince, that luxury and sensuality shall be punished in a future state. Hence we see the propriety of the description given of him. He was a rich man, clothed in purple and fine linen, and he fared sumptuously every day. Purple was the peculiar dress of kings and emperors, and consisted, agreeably to the manner in which it is here described, of fine linen dyed of a purple colour. To the gate of this rich man was brought a beggar, decrepit, naked and diseased. The purple inhabitant notices not the destitute stranger. He neither invites him within his doors, nor sends food for his relief, nor oil to anoint, nor clothes to shelter, his ulcerated limbs. He permits him only to gather the crumbs that fell from his table, and the dogs to come and lick his sores. Lazarus languishes and dies. Dives dies also, and has the pomp and solemnity of a funeral, but here his honours and his felicity ended. The circumstances of the two are now completely changed. Lazarus is conveyed by angels to the bosom of Abraham; but the rich man opens his eyes in torments. seat is allotted to Abraham; and Lazarus, reclining after the manner of the Romans at table, has his head leaning on his bosom. See John xiii. Their ideas of torment by fire, are borrowed from the valley of the sons of Hinnom, rendered infamous for idolatry, and particularly for the burning of infants to Moloch, fires being always kept there for that purpose. See Lightfoot's Works, Vol. II. p. 141. Their paradise resembled the Elysium of the Greeks, and, it seems, was separated from Hades by an impassable stream. Such notions as these may serve very well for the scenery of a parable, but cannot be supposed to be an exact account of the hell and heaven revealed in the gospel. In parables, many circumstances, for the sake of dress, colour and ornament, are introduced, though not strictly true, and, therefore, should be either disregarded altogether, or interpreted with great latitude. It is to be observed that the parable leads us to conclude, that retributive justice takes place immediately after death. Lazarus is, without any interval, in the bosom of Abraham, and Dives lifts up his eyes in torments, as soon as they are closed on this world. But in other parts of the New Testament, judgment is represented as taking place after the general resurrection. Our Lord, however, might here hold it forth as instantaneous, merely to give a greater effect to the parable: and it cannot escape observation, that each of the characters is exhibited not as a pure, but an embodied spirit. Not the soul of Lazarus, but Lazarus himself, is translated into paradise, and Dives has bodily organs in torments. But it is necessary to distinguish between the moral lesson, conveyed by the parable, and the dress or scenery of it, which consists of notions, popular among the Jews, but which Jesus adopted without intending to sanction them, in order to give force, grace and colour to his representation. The great lesson he inculcates is, that there will be a state of retribution, in which the good, however poor and destitute, shall be recompensed; and the Though the rich man is punished, wicked, however rich and powerful, the vices by which he forfeited the punished; in which the present ine- favour of heaven are not enumerated. qualities of the Divine government He is only said to have been rich, to shall be rectified, the triumphs of have been clothed in purple, and to vice humbled, and the afflictions of have fared sumptuously every day; virtue exchanged for a crown of and it is insinuated, that he suffered a glory. Whatever it contains beyond fellow-creature to perish at his gate this, our Lord did not, I apprehend, through hunger, disease and nakedinculcate as an article of Christian ness. But though this was a grievous faith. The Jews believed that the instance of inhumanity, it was not his spirits of just men were carried by only crime. Herod was both a murangels to the seats of bliss. Here derer and an adulterer; and history beatified men are represented as at an represents him withal, as actuated by entertainment. The most honourable extreme avarice and ambition. He The rich man appears to have had, when among the living, no apprehension of his present doom: and his brethren seemed as little to expect a similar fate. The belief of a future state was general among the Jews. But Herod was in all probability a Sadducee, who, like the Epicureans, derided the notion of a future punish ment as fabulous. Hence the propriety of our Lord's inculcating it in this place, and his introducing this wicked man as an actor, in illustrating the truth of it. The rich man makes no mention of his wife and children, whom it was still more natural to warn against coming to that place of torment than his brethren. But Herod the Tetrarch appears to have had no children; and the woman who lived with him the latter part of his life, was the legitimate wife of his brother Philip. It would have been out of character, though he loved her beyond all others, to solicit the intercession of Abraham, in behalf of a woman of this description. So exactly do even the parables of Jesus correspond to truth and nature, wherever correspondence was practicable. He says that he had five brethren, whom he wished to apprize of their future doom. This is not accidental. These brethren must have been his relations, and it is remarkable, that the Herodian princes, who governed from Herod the Great, until Herod Agrippa, who was the last of that race, and who governed when Jerusalem was taken, were five in number. The destruction of that city was not only known but always present to Jesus, in all its circumstances: and he could not but be sensible, that the power of that family would then terminate. It deserves our notice, moreover, that our Saviour represents not only the prophets, but also Moses, as preaching a future state and a retributive justice, with an evidence not to be resisted by any who admitted their divine mission; "Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets: let them hear them. If they hear not Moses and the prophets, though one rise from the dead, they will not be persuaded." Here the words are so chosen and arranged, that while Abraham appears to refuse the request, he insinuates that it should be complied with, and yet such would be the obstinacy of his brethren, as to continue in immorality and scepticism. The request was more immediately fulfilled in the resurrection of Lazarus, who, as being in his mind when relating the parable, probably furnished by association the name which he here gave to the poor man at the gate of Dives. It was more completely fulfilled in his own resurrection; and yet none of the Herodian family, though convinced of the fact, became converts to his gospel. One of them indeed said on a memorable occasion, "Almost thou persuadest me to become a Christian." The generous wish of the apostle was never realized, "I would to God, that not only thou, but also all that hear me this day, were both almost and altogether such as I am, except these bonds." Acts xxvi. 28, 29. SIR, J. JONES. Clapton, March 16, 1824. 66 ad are quoted by Beausobre, in his the following lines, the Latin History of the Reformation, as dressed to the Pope" by Luther, "at the conclusion of his treatise" De Captivitate Babylonicâ. They are described by Dr. Macaulay, the translator of the History in 1801, as "the beginning of an hymn written by Seduus, which is sung in the Roman Church at the Epiphany." Dr. M. has added, in a note, (I. 348,) the French and English versions, which are both, I apprehend, of his composition. J. T. R. "Hostis Herodes impie, Christum venire, quid times? Non arripit mortalia Qui regna dat cœlestia." "Herode impie et sanguinaire, Pourquoi crains-tu le Christ qui veut naitre en ces lieux ? Celui qui donne a tous le royaume des cieux, N'envahit point ceux de la terre." "Say, impious Herod! sanguinary king! Why shakes thy guilty soul with coward fear? What tho' the Christ, whom ancient prophets sing, Within these realms in mortal guise appear; Yet learn, the hands that heavenly crowns bestow, Stoop not to seize the dross of those below." ourselves, and hardening our hearts fearfully. In one sense I wish I 'could run away from myself and lose myself in divine contemplations; but I understand you to mean that our sense of the importance of spiritual things is evaporating in talk: this is very possible. As for the effect upon the heart of searching humbly into the divine counsels, I have found it very salutary; and I hope to prosecute A Friendly Correspondence between my inquiries with increasing fervour. an Unitarian and a Calvinist. (Continued from p. 281.) I was coming in due course to your queries, which involve the whole question, and therefore called for much preliminary explanation. But I see that you are much too sore to relish any thing in the style of discussion usual among men, who reason with each other on grounds of equality. You are seated in St. Peter's chair, and I must make my approaches with becoming humility. If the question between us had respected personal attainments in practical religion, I should be most willing to humble my self even to a worm; but this is not professedly the point in view. It relates to the general sense of the sacred Scriptures in respect to the duration of future punishment-a question in which I honestly confess that I feel myself a party interested, and which therefore I cannot regard with the same degree of sang froid which you, who are one of the elect, can do. This distinction in our respective cases you constantly overlook. I should like much to know whether or not your object is to hear what I have to say, or whether it be merely to give ine lectures. If the latter, I will hear them, and, what is more, I will weigh and consider them; but then you must not send me queries with spaces for my answers, because this is placing temptation in my way. If we are doing wrong in discussing the decrees of heaven, the blame lies at your door; for you know I would have come to a period long ago; and moreover the discussion originated with you. You have only to say desist, and silence ensies. You say we are running away from I, of course, cannot answer for you. I shall now turn to your queries, but will not promise to take them in chronological order. "The condition," you say, "of departed spirits cannot be affected by any thing that we can say, or think, or feel respecting them." This the Church of Rome would deny in toto; and, as you seem very adverse to the exercise of reason in matters of religion, you ought, to be consistent, to abide by the authority of that church, from which you are a heretical dissenter. They pray for the dead, and allege scripture for the practice. They tell you that Christ after his resurrection preached the gospel to the Antediluvian sinners, and that the phrase "who were sometimes disobedient," implies that they had then become obedient. But let that pass. Whether or not the condition of departed spirits can be affected by our thoughts or feelings, is more than I know; but this I do know, that no man of sensibility, who has lost a near and dear relative, can possibly refrain from thinking of their state and condition, and feeling a deep anxiety for their welfare. But placing this out of view, since the Scriptures have adverted to the state of the dead, it is highly proper that we should clearly understand what they teach upon that awful subject. Your people have taken it upon them to enter largely into it, and you can scarcely hear a sermon that does not more or less advert to the never-ending duration of future punishment. When therefore a set of men, professing to speak the words of God, and to make known his will, take upon them thus to define it, others who have free access to the oracles of God, have an undoubted right to search and inquire whether or not they are correctly explained, and, if not, to stand up boldly for the true sense. Those who with me are decidedly of exclaim, "Just and true are all thy ways, O thou King of saints," while we hold an opinion in direct contradiction to all our ideas of justice and truth? When your people tell me that God will not to all eternity shew mercy to thousands of millions of souls, which he has made, how can I say Amen! to the prayer which ascribes infinite goodness and mercy to such a dreadful Being? I cannot do it, and you might as well attempt to erase every notion of truth from my mind, as to persuade me to believe in such a palpable contradiction. If you have such a faculty, it is yours, and you are welcome to keep it. In another query, you ask me, "Which of the two sects experiences most of the blessed change described by the Lord Jesus Christ and the apostles? not meaning a false Calvinist as one of them." I profess myself totally disqualified for returning a decided answer to this question, because I am not sufficiently acquainted with the parties between whom I am required to make a comparison. Our blessed Saviour, the author and finisher of our faith, has told us that the tree is to be known by its fruits, and his apostle has given us a description of the fruits which are produced by good and by bad trees. The first are-love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, (fidelity,) from which they all spring, meekness, temperance. The second are, adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings and such like. God alone can see the naked heart. We can only judge of men by what comes out of their mouths and by their actions. I will whisper a word in your ear-it is, that taking the above list in my hand, I shall find very many of the good fruits, where there is little pretension; and that among those who claim for themselves the possession of the Spirit, I shall miss the fruits of gentleness and meekness, and chance to discover wrath and strife. Do not, however, I pray you, suppose that I am going to question the existence of true piety and philanthropy among the Calvinists. That sect of Christians (for, after all, it is but a sect) has produced men whom all who love the name of Christ will acknowledge to have been burning and shining lights: far be it from me to charge upon them all the consequences of the hideous error which they maintain. They have been active in preaching the forgiveness of sins, and in displaying the comforts and joys of religion, in spite of their errors. In fact, the general effect produced by the Scriptures at large, and by the glorious works of God in the world, has been such as to overpower and render, in a great measure, inoperative the horrid dogma of vindictive punishment. I should like very well to sit under a well-informed, pious Calvinist preacher, if I could be assured that he would confine his discourses to the elect, and shew how all things shall work together for their good; but the moment he ventures beyond that circle, he gets out of his depth, and becomes an unsafe guide. He involves his own mind, and the minds of his hearers, in contradiction and darkness. As for the sect of Christians which maintains the glorious doctrine of the restitution of all things, their number, though increasing, is but small. They have hitherto been much engaged in controversy, which (as it is usually conducted) is not favourable to the growth of the peaceable fruits of righteousness; and yet I have met among them men who have a deep sense of the importance, I should rather say of the indispensable necessity, of personal religion. For a reverence for the Deity and for the Scriptures, I never yet knew a human being who manifested that feeling in the same degree as the late Mr. Winchester. "Does not the genuine Calvinist exhibit true philanthropy by holding forth danger in the strongest terms, that his neighbour may be thoroughly roused and escape it altogether?" A man who stands forth in the character of a preacher, is undoubtedly bound to teach honestly and faithfully, what he himself believes to be true; and, therefore, if a man really believes that future punishment will be endless, he cannot, of course, acquit his conscience if he does not declare that awful conviction. But I am fully persuaded that no man believes it. I have already given my reasons for so thinking. It is at most a momentary suspicion, which could not co-exist five minutes with sanity. Those who profess to believe it, smile and talk about every-day matters like other men. They sit at feasts, and attend at marriages and christenings, and congratulate fathers and mothers on the increase of their families. This is all very proper; but it is wholly inconsistent with the idea, that of the children thus produced, the chances are that the majority is doomed to everlasting misery. Thus you see that the doctrine which you are so anxious to inculcate, does not merely affect the dead, but the living, and those who are yet unborn. I never heard a good man say that we should have no concern for posterity. I feel that I have undertaken a most arduous task in thus explaining the reason of the hope that is in me; but I have no apprehension, feeble as ny powers are, of being able to produce scriptural answers to all the objections which you can start. Of the effect of my endeavours to produce an alteration in your sentiments I cannot be sanguine. He who constructed our minds knows what spring to touch; and in his own good time he will assuredly lead us to the knowledge of all those truths which can add to our happiness. Meanwhile let us bear with each other. I think I am possessed of an invaluable truth. Let me then be thankful, and by no means indulge an angry feeling towards a good man, who has not yet gained the same prize. I must beg of you to refrain from putting any more queries till I have answered those before me. The next on the list will require much consideration on my part. Yours affectionately, I. Again I repeat, that if these communications have become disagreeable and unprofitable to you, they shall, as far as I am concerned, be discontinued at your bidding. N to I. 7th October. The evil which you have described ought, as you say, to be "investigated fully," for otherwise we cannot duly |